jean_escanye

<p>I have a post somewhere with Holux Gpslim connected to D300.</p>

<p>The "old" 7600i was already using LED lighting. My opinion is just a change in software.</p>

 

<p>I have a D300 with a grip which is fine but I feel weight is huge at the end of the day (with age).<br>

I keep my D70 for the lazy days with the small 1.8/35 ( weight divided by more than 2 !). 6 Mpix is sufficient as well as sensitivity in usual circumstances; the only problem is for highly cotrasted or backlit pictures where blooming appears, which I forgot with the D300. All for all, I will never sell it and it will end in my collection with a F2, a FE2, a F601 ...</p>

 

<p>See my post in <a href="../filters-bags-tripods-accessories-forum/00YjtY">http://www.photo.net/filters-bags-tripods-accessories-forum/00YjtY</a><br>

(accessories/misc.equip. /connecting a GPS to Nikon). Regards.</p>

<p>I have read a number of posts on connecting a serial or bluetooth GPS to a NIKON camera which use complex electronics. I disagree with that and want to show you how easy it can be done :<br>

1) suppose you have a pro Nikon with the 10 pin connector (should be similar for other cameras)<br>

2) suppose you have a standard Bluetooth GPS (here HOLUX GPSlim240, it has a serial output as many)<br>

3) suppose you have a serial USB to GPS cable (for your telephone)<br>

then you can (you will have to weld a mini USB plug)<br>

1) connect the GPS to reprogram it to 4800 Bauds with the cable (I use the program SIRFtech)<br>

2) connect the GPS to the camera (see stellardesign for the 10 pin connector) AND HAVE IT DONE !<br>

If you want to reuse your GPS in Bluetooth mode with a phone or anything else, just reprogram it to<br>

38400 Baud, THAT'S ALL !<br>

NOTE: no need for a transistor or any electronic component (just SERIAL OUT from GPS (cmos level) to SERIAL IN in Nikon (cmos in) and GND (2 wires !!). <br>

GOOD LUCK IF YOU NEED A GPS IN CAMERA AND DON'T WANT TO SPEND A LOT OF MONEY.</p><div></div>

<p>To my opinion, it would be interesting to compare quality of the results with this adapter from a wide-angle and then a tele lens (I would say quite bad with a wide-angle, not so bad with a tele) but you cannot expect very qualitative results (as compared with the original Rokkor merits). This is similar to the doubler you can use (a Nikon doubler is by far more complex than this adapter (achromatic doublet ?) and works better with a tele.</p>

<p>And the not too fair looking adapter ...</p><div></div>

<p>To be more precise, as I just received another question, the adapter is a nikon mount macro reverse adapter with 52 mm thread readily available. As we have to shorten the mount by 2 mm (right), I used a milling machine to cut the adapter. The back of the 1.4/50 minolta lens can be easily taken off and the adapter can be screwed in place. The main problem is that these adapters are built in aluminium and are misshapen when milling, so sensor is not exactly perpendicular to the lens axis. Focussing is not uniform away from the lens axis when I study my images. A better quality adapter can maybe do the job. <br>

I tested this because I had in hand the minolta lens and I wanted to practise night shots with my D70. To day, I abandoned this game because newer camera are more sensitive and my nikkor 1.8/50 is sufficient, so my minolta lens was reassembled and went back to my SRT101 body in my photo museum.</p>

<p>Sorry, I answered too quickly, my statement should have been (<a href="http://www.markerink.org/WJM/HTML/mounts.htm">http://www.markerink.org/WJM/HTML/mounts.htm</a>)<br>

Minolta AF 44.50 mm<br />Minolta MD 43.50 mm<br>

so, difference is 1 mm between AF and (MC/MD) mounts. Y're right.</p>

 

<p>MINOLTA had MC and MD mounts. They are quite different since the distance from film-plane to bayonet-mount differs by 2 mm. A MD lens is quite easier to adapt than a MC (older) lens. </p>

Just said it was a chinese Nikon macro reversal ring (2 mm cut because MC mount is wider

than Nikon) but focussing is too difficult with a small viewer like that of the D70. I could think

to use this lens with my D300 which has far larger viewer ... but this is quite crazy to put

a not so good as you think lens on such an expensive body! Regards.

Hello,

I made this fitting for fun and, with a non-zoom lens, like the 50mm this is satisfactory, and more or less useful (the plane of the mount has to be exactly parallel to the film, and with a DSLR, this is far more demanding - defects are evident on my results).

However, fitting a zoom lens would be far more difficult because mechanical postioning of the mount for focal distance has to be done exactly (otherwise focus changes with focal length because the lens is not where it shold be)- a precision around 50 microns is my guess.

Thus, AF is a must (try manual focus with the small viewer of D70 !), and we are lead to another joy of Nikon users, that is "chipping" a lens (search RoRo on this forum) which, in my view

is far more useful but cannot have commercial application because of Nikon patents ...

It is indeed possible: I did it with a low cost reverse macro lens adapter (VirtualVillage on ebay) after taking off the rear ring of the MC 1.4/58mm lens from my old SRT101 and replacing it with this ring. The main problem is the 2mm difference in mount position between the 2 makes, so I had to cut into the adapter in order to focus at infinity (this adapter is built in aluminium and prone to

deformations, so I do not recommend it for 600mm !). Evidently, you

have to work in manual mode (my purpose was hand held night shots).

Picture is http://www.photo.net/photo/4888698 .<div></div>